This is the second part of my notes about negotiations, discussing the styles of negotiation that I prefer to use. The first part is here: Negotiation Notes: Introduction
Negotiation Notes, Part 2 : Opt In vs Opt Out
I think that negotiations fall into two broad categories: Opt-In, and Opt-Out.
Opt-out
The first type of negotiations I saw when I entered the scene were “opt-out” style. The top would ask the bottom what their limits were, and the bottom was supposed to list all the things they didn’t want to do. In some cases it was treated like a game where the Dom/top was trying to find and exploit loopholes in the sub or bottom’s limits. I remember hearing some of the domly-doms saying things like “Ha! She said no toys in her ass, but she didn’t say anything about dicks!”. We hoped they were joking, but it underlined that way of thinking: the dom’s mission was to do all-the-things, and the sub’s job was to stop them.
This would usually work fine when both people understood what was involved in the proposed scene. For play being done in public dungeons with specific rules it was fairly efficient. If the play space didn’t allow nudity or sex, then we could be fairly sure that a flogging scene wouldn’t result in any sexual consent violations. The problems happened when the play was in private, the venue changed, or the top and bottom had different ideas of what was “standard” in the type of play they were about to do. Each of us can have a slightly different idea of what goes into even the simplest play: to some people, caressing their partner’s ass between strikes of a spanking would be normal while others might feel that it falls into the realm of intimate touching.
When things did go wrong, it was often blamed on the bottom. A bottom might complain after a scene “Hey! He fingered me while I was tied up and I didn’t want that.” Someone would ask them if they had listed fingering as limit, and if they hadn’t they would be told to remember to remember to list that next time they did rope. Or they might get told that this particular top does that to everyone they play with, and the bottom should have expected it. (I have actually seen a top try to justify non negotiated sexual contact during a rope scene by saying that they only ever do play that is sexual, that it should have been expected)
Over and over I have seen these types of violations occur, where things that had neither been agreed to nor excluded were happening. There was very rarely any admission of wrongdoing, and it was almost always treated as a failure on the bottom’s part to negotiate properly. Sometimes we’d hear the top justify their behavior, saying things like “I like to push my partner’s boundaries”, or even suggesting that they had taught their bottom a valuable lesson.
This style of negotiation puts a huge burden on the bottoms, requiring them to think of every possible thing that could happen and listing it as a limit. I think there are better ways to do it, that more fairly divide the responsibilities between the people involved.
Opt-In
I prefer the “Opt-In” type of negotiation. In this style, our starting point is that nothing is allowed, and we add in consent for the activities we are ok with. If someone hasn’t agreed to an activity, then it isn’t something we will do.
To do this I like to ask clear questions that I can get a definite enthusiastic “Yes” answer to. I like to be specific, especially about things that could be open to interpretation. Sometimes they will get very detailed, but it lets me be confident when I play.
Being 100% certain that I have my partner’s consent for the things I do lets me act with confidence, without hesitating. It lets me carry out my scenes with an air of authority, instead of hesitating while I try to figure out if something is ok or not.
While asking the questions, I try to avoid euphemisms or coy terms for things. Asking someone if I can touch them in a sexy way is pretty vague. Asking if I can grope and squeeze their breasts is much more direct, and they know exactly what we are talking about.
At first, it can be a little embarrassing to ask such direct questions, especially around intimate or sexual activities. We also open ourselves up to the possibility of rejection. If I ask someone if I can flog the bottom of their feet and they say “no”, it’s not a big deal. If I ask if I can kiss them and they say “no”, it can feel much more personal. So, I need to have a certain amount of courage to ask about the things I want. My partners generally recognize the honesty and vulnerability involved, and appreciate it. I think that being honest about our desires, and being willing to accept a “no” is part of what builds trust.
A “yes” answer can often be conditional. My partner might not be sure if they will enjoy something, so they could say “Yes you can try hitting with canes on my ass, just go lightly at first and if I don’t like it I will say so.” It is important for me that my partners know that agreeing to something in negotiation doesn’t take away their right to say no to it at any time, and without needing to provide any explanation.
Likewise, sometimes a “no” will come with an invitation to ask again in the future. Someone might tell me “Not this time”, indicating that it is something that can be discussed for future play scenes.
Checklists
Another “old school” method we used a lot was the checklist. The top would give the bottom a checklist to fill out. The bottom had to rate a number of activities (sometimes in the hundreds) on scales of 0 to 5 to show what they were interested in doing. Once their homework was done, they would hand it in to the top and that was their negotiation.
I do think there are some cases where checklists can be useful, but just as a way of starting the discussion or introducing ideas. I believe there is a lot more that needs to be talked about than a checklist can capture by itself. Some topics on checklists are very open to misunderstandings. For example, is someone who checks off the box saying they want to experience “orgasm denial” saying that they want to have sexual contact with their top? To some people orgasm denial could mean bringing someone close to the edge with toys, touching, and/or fucking; to others it could mean there is zero contact and they are just told that they are not allowed to cum. The checklist alone can’t give these answers, I need to take the time to understand what my partner is really consenting to.
This is maybe a good time to point out that someone’s FetLife list of fetishes and limits doesn’t replace negotiation and obtaining consent. It seems obvious, but I have actually had a bottom tell me about the time a top did something to them which they hadn’t discussed, and afterward justified it by saying that it had been listed on the bottom’s FetLife fetish list so the top thought it was OK to do.
One of the reasons I don’t like to use checklists now is that I think they reduce BDSM play to a collection of activities. Lately I have encountered a bit too much of the “bucket list” approach, where people have a list of things they want to try and are working to get those checked off. I want my play to be more based on emotions and connection, and less on accomplishing a list of physical acts. That’s just my approach though, others may feel differently.
Collaboration
I think that the key to successful negotiation is for me to try and understand what my partner wants, let them know what I want, and discuss honestly how we can best achieve that. I believe that whatever method is used, I should be striving to make sure we both have the same understanding of what are are agreeing to, that we are collaborating to come up with a scene that will meet all of our needs. I think that openness and honesty are the ways to get there, and by being unafraid to ask the difficult questions.
Next time, I’ll discuss my views on informed consent.
